Senators reintroduce the ‘Lock the Clock’ bill, sparking debate over the future of Daylight Saving Time in America.
At a Glance
- Bipartisan group of senators reintroduce the Sunshine Protection Act to make Daylight Saving Time permanent
- Bill aims to eliminate biannual clock changes and provide more evening sunlight
- Sleep experts and health organizations oppose the move, advocating for permanent Standard Time
- Debate centers on balancing public convenience with health and safety concerns
- Previous attempt passed Senate unanimously but stalled in the House
Bipartisan Push for Permanent Daylight Saving Time
A group of senators, led by Florida Republican Rick Scott, has reintroduced the Sunshine Protection Act, aiming to make Daylight Saving Time (DST) permanent year-round across the United States. This bipartisan effort, dubbed the ‘Lock the Clock’ movement, seeks to end the practice of changing clocks twice a year, a tradition many Americans find increasingly burdensome and outdated.
The bill, which has garnered support from both sides of the aisle, including senators Patty Murray, Tommy Tuberville, and Rand Paul, proposes to keep clocks set to DST throughout the year. This would result in later sunrises and sunsets during winter months, effectively eliminating the need to “fall back” in autumn.
BREAKING: Senator Rick Scott has introduced the bipartisan Sunshine Protection Act, to officially “lock the clock” and end the twice-yearly time change and make Daylight Saving Time the national year-round standard
— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) January 9, 2025
Arguments for Permanent Daylight Saving Time
Proponents of the bill argue that permanent DST would provide numerous benefits to American society. They claim it would simplify lives, improve public health, boost the economy, and enhance mental well-being by providing more daylight in the evenings. This additional evening light, they argue, could lead to increased outdoor activities and potentially reduce crime rates.
“I hear from Americans constantly that they are sick and tired of changing their clocks twice a year – it’s an unnecessary, decades-old practice that’s more of an annoyance to families than benefit to them. I’m excited to have President Trump back in the White House and fully on board to LOCK THE CLOCK so we can get this good bill passed and make this common-sense change that will simplify and benefit the lives of American families,” wrote Sen. Scott in a statement.
Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts emphasized the economic and social advantages of the proposed change, stating that it could positively impact happiness and productivity. The golf industry has also voiced support for the measure, citing the benefits of extended evening daylight for their business.
Opposition and Health Concerns
Despite the enthusiasm from some quarters, the proposal faces significant opposition, particularly from sleep experts and health organizations. The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) has been vocal in its criticism of permanent DST, instead advocating for year-round Standard Time.
The AASM cites research indicating potential health risks associated with permanent DST, including increased rates of strokes, hospital admissions, and traffic fatalities. They argue that Standard Time aligns more closely with natural circadian rhythms, which could lead to improved sleep patterns and overall health outcomes.
“Permanent, year-round standard time is the best choice to most closely match our circadian sleep-wake cycle. Daylight saving time results in more darkness in the morning and more light in the evening, disrupting the body’s natural rhythm,” said Dr. M. Adeel Rishi.
Legislative Hurdles and Future Prospects
While the Sunshine Protection Act passed unanimously in the Senate during the 117th Congress, it failed to gain traction in the House of Representatives. The current reintroduction faces similar challenges, with some lawmakers expressing concerns about potential safety issues arising from darker mornings during winter months.
As the debate continues, Americans remain divided on the issue. While many welcome the prospect of more evening daylight year-round, others are concerned about the potential health and safety implications. The coming months will likely see intense discussions in Congress, as lawmakers weigh the benefits and drawbacks of this significant change to the nation’s timekeeping practices.
